Arlington ESports Stadium - Arlington, TX, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool for each fencer, with their actual victories highlighted in a box. Learn more.
| # | Name | Number of victories | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ||
| 1 | SEEFELDT William Henry C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 59% |
| 2 | ELHUSSEINI Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 51% | |
| 3 | ROMANOV Ethan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 22% |
| 3 | ZIEGLER John | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 20% | |
| 5 | TAI Edison | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 5% | |
| 6 | MAZAHERI Fletcher | 100% | 99% | 87% | 57% | 21% | 3% | |
| 7 | GONZALEZ Kian | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 31% | 6% | |
| 8 | REAGAN Henry | 100% | 93% | 67% | 30% | 7% | 1% | |
| 9 | ELLISON Harper F. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 23% | |
| 10 | HOWARD Paolo | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 17% | 2% | |
| 11 | ELHUSSEINI Kyle | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 55% | 11% |
| 12 | OBREBSKI Kevin | 100% | 98% | 81% | 43% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 13 | MEHROTRA Neel | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% | |
| 14 | ZENG Andrew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 34% | 7% |
| 15 | HERNDON Liam | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 28% | 5% | |
| 16 | VINOTH Aaron | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 21% | |
| 17 | CHIN Dylan A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 11% |
| 18 | LIU Josh | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 17% | |
| 19 | LIOZNYANSKY Miron | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 21% | 3% |
| 20 | BOUDREAUX James | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% | |
| 21 | RAO Neil | 100% | 94% | 69% | 33% | 8% | 1% | |
| 22 | LOISEAU Oscar | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 52% | 15% | 1% |
| 23 | KUANG Bryan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
| 24 | DADE MAXIMUS | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
| 25 | PARKER Isaiah | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 9% | |
| 26 | LEE DoWon | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 24% | 3% | |
| 27 | VEERAVALLI Vivek | 100% | 95% | 72% | 38% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 28 | COHEN Nathan | 100% | 95% | 74% | 38% | 10% | 1% | |
| 29 | SOOS Whitman | 100% | 64% | 23% | 4% | - | - | |
| 30 | LEE Nathan | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 21% | 3% | |
| 31 | MCMAHAN Christopher D. | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 32 | CHEN Leetyan | 100% | 96% | 76% | 42% | 13% | 2% | |
| 33 | POHL Philip | 100% | 92% | 61% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 34 | LESCURE Dimitri | 100% | 88% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - | |
| 35 | CARDENAS Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 31% | |
| 36 | KARIDIS-SCHNEIDER Samuel | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 19% | 2% | |
| 37 | OLSON Joseph | 100% | 98% | 84% | 47% | 13% | 1% | |
| 38 | KUANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 67% | 33% | 7% |
| 39 | PATEL Avi | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 25% | 4% | |
| 40 | LI Tristan | 100% | 96% | 75% | 40% | 12% | 1% | |
| 40 | STANTIAL Grant | 100% | 96% | 75% | 39% | 11% | 1% | |
| 42 | PEREZ Daniel | 100% | 60% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 43 | JOHNSON Soren | 100% | 94% | 68% | 30% | 7% | 1% | |
| 44 | SIEDOW William | 100% | 94% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | |
| 45 | DECKER Hunter | 100% | 95% | 69% | 30% | 7% | 1% | |
| 46 | DONG Haiyi | 100% | 100% | 96% | 82% | 52% | 20% | 3% |
| 47 | NAM Nathaniel | 100% | 82% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 48 | HUANG Kenneth | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 11% | |
| 49 | HAWLEY Justin | 100% | 82% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 50 | RAPALSKI Thomas | 100% | 88% | 55% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 51 | SATHYAN Dev | 100% | 43% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 52 | VAN VACTER Thomas | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 27% | 5% | - |
| 53 | ARMSTRONG TyLee | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
| 54 | SUNIL Rishab | 100% | 64% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 55 | KOSTUSIAK Evan | 100% | 81% | 44% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 56 | DADE Augustus | 100% | 68% | 24% | 4% | - | - | |
| 57 | MASSIE Jay Thomas | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
The heatmap in this table provides a visual representation of the victory probability distribution for each fencer in their respective pools:
This heatmap visualization offers an immediate understanding of each fencer's expected performance compared to their actual results.